On the Power of Interactive Proofs for Learning
We continue the study of doubly-efficient proof systems for verifying agnostic PAC learning, for which we obtain the following results. - We construct an interactive protocol for learning the $t$ largest Fourier characters of a given function $f \colon \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}$ up to an arbitrarily small error, wherein the verifier uses $\mathsf{poly}(t)$ random examples. This improves upon the Interactive Goldreich-Levin protocol of Goldwasser, Rothblum, Shafer, and Yehudayoff (ITCS 2021) whose sample complexity is $\mathsf{poly}(t,n)$. - For agnostically learning the class $\mathsf{AC}^0[2]$ under the uniform distribution, we build on the work of Carmosino, Impagliazzo, Kabanets, and Kolokolova (APPROX/RANDOM 2017) and design an interactive protocol, where given a function $f \colon \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}$, the verifier learns the closest hypothesis up to $\mathsf{polylog}(n)$ multiplicative factor, using quasi-polynomially many random examples. In contrast, this class has been notoriously resistant even for constructing realisable learners (without a prover) using random examples. - For agnostically learning $k$-juntas under the uniform distribution, we obtain an interactive protocol, where the verifier uses $O(2^k)$ random examples to a given function $f \colon \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}$. Crucially, the sample complexity of the verifier is independent of $n$. We also show that if we do not insist on doubly-efficient proof systems, then the model becomes trivial. Specifically, we show a protocol for an arbitrary class $\mathcal{C}$ of Boolean functions in the distribution-free setting, where the verifier uses $O(1)$ labeled examples to learn $f$.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
PAC learningSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
How to Avoid Debate: Scalable AI Safety via Doubly-Efficient Interactive Proofs
As AI models continue to develop powerful capabilities, it becomes critical that we are able to verify that their output is aligned with our intentions. A recent line of work focuses on verification via debate, a model o…
Neural Interactive Proofs
We consider the problem of how a trusted, but computationally bounded agent (a 'verifier') can learn to interact with one or more powerful but untrusted agents ('provers') in order to solve a given task. More specificall…
StepProof: Step-by-step verification of natural language mathematical proofs
Interactive theorem provers (ITPs) are powerful tools for the formal verification of mathematical proofs down to the axiom level. However, their lack of a natural language interface remains a significant limitation. Rece…
Mathematical ProofsSentenceEvonne: Interactive Proof Visualization for Description Logics (System Description) -- Extended Version
Explanations for description logic (DL) entailments provide important support for the maintenance of large ontologies. The "justifications" usually employed for this purpose in ontology editors pinpoint the parts of the …
Towards Autoformalization of Mathematics and Code Correctness: Experiments with Elementary Proofs
The ever-growing complexity of mathematical proofs makes their manual verification by mathematicians very cognitively demanding. Autoformalization seeks to address this by translating proofs written in natural language i…
Mathematical ProofsSemantic Parsing